Skip to comments.
Downing Street reveals ‘deception skills’ of Saddam, the artful dodger
The Sunday Times ^
| February 2, 2003
| Nicholas Rufford
Posted on 02/01/2003 4:01:36 PM PST by MadIvan
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-44 next last
To: Byron_the_Aussie
Ive, you're going to compare Hitler and Galtieri, both of whom attacked British territory, with Saddam, who doesn't even control the northern and southern parts of his own country? Hitler didn't attack British territory to provoke the Second World War. He attacked Poland.
The point is, that many naysayers in the British government and the peace movements of the time said many of the same things - "war is unpredictable" and so on. Well that's true. Well done. But that doesn't mean that wars should not be fought, nor that there aren't legitimate reasons to fight.
Saddam Hussein has invaded two of his neighbours in the past, is obviously hiding WMD, trying to obtain WMD, funds terrorism. He is a nasty piece of work who should be taken out. And it is clear that just hitting him with a few cruise missiles will not do the job.
Yes going in is unpredictable. Going anywhere is unpredictable. Which makes your perfect prescience that it will all turn out badly all the more curious.
Regards, Ivan
21
posted on
02/01/2003 5:03:40 PM PST
by
MadIvan
To: Principled
To: Byron_the_Aussie
To: Congressman Billybob
...NOTHING that the "Left rallies around" ever makes me nervous....Well, it should, Congressman.
NEVER underestimate them. They're as dangerous as a pet cobra.
To: MadIvan
...and it is clear that just hitting him with a few cruise missiles will not do the job....Clear to who?
I think that's the ideal exit strategy, on this one. Saddam taken out, the Left undercut, and $50 billion saved.
To: Byron_the_Aussie
Clear to who? Byron, think about the recent past. Since when has a cruise missile campaign taken out any regime?
Ivan
26
posted on
02/01/2003 5:31:22 PM PST
by
MadIvan
To: Byron_the_Aussie
It is not the job of the UN, the US, the Brits, or anyone else for that matter to "find" the Iraqi's WMD's. The UN mandate is clear. The Iraqi's must account for the weapons that the inspectors had previously detailed. The fact that they haven't has put them in material breach.
You are with us, or you are with the terrorist. We will treat those that harbor and support terrorism the same as the terrorist. Saddam brags about the money he sends to families of homicide bombers. Guilty by his own admission. WMD. Supports Terrorists. Murders his own. Threatens the region and beyond.
Welcome to Pax Americana. The US is the only country left that can project the kind of power and influence neccessary to wipe this scum from the face of the earth. And we intend to do it. Saddam is finished. Period.
Bootyist
Ps. I thought you Aussies had pulled your collective heads out of your butts after Bali?
To: Byron_the_Aussie
The onus is on the President or the PM to produce itI see revisionism in your past, or is it future? This is the most unilateralist thinking there is. Change the resolutions, by yourself, 12 years after they were signed and sealed...then pretend it was that way all along.
The standing arrangement set forth by the UN in each and every (all 16 or so) resolutions is that the burden is upon Saddam to proove his compliance.
The very resolution that stopped the Gulf War was signed on the agreement of a losers burden to be placed upon Saddam.
To: Byron_the_Aussie
Tomahawk Saddam? That will definately not be appreciated by the nieghbors. If the US merely kills Saddam, then Saddam Jr will take over...or the place will fall apart and refugees will be all over the place. There could also be ethnic and civil unrest. Turkey and Saudi will be full of refugees.
In the end the Tomahawk alone theory won't work. It will just add more complexities to the problem but not remove it.
I say take the place over and set up a government that is moderate so that the Iraqis can have their own country and resources (in the long run). We are not trying to subjigate them, just eliminate a threat. If we do it right, the Iraqis can stay right where they are at, and then everyone is happy.
Your over simplified version will cause more problems than it fixes.
To: MadIvan
..Since when has a cruise missile campaign taken out any regime?...Well, it hasn't be used. But President Reagan used a similar tactic (if not weapon) on a similar dictator, Muammar Ghaddafi.
And he's been quiescent ever since.
To: Byron_the_Aussie
And he's been quiescent ever since. Oh no he hasn't! Haven't you been seeing what he's been up to in Zimbabwe, for example?
Ivan
31
posted on
02/01/2003 6:31:03 PM PST
by
MadIvan
To: bootyist-monk
...it is not the job of the UN, the US, the Brits, or anyone else for that matter to "find" the Iraqi's WMD's. The UN mandate is clear....Yes, it is. The reality is, that's the only way we're going to get everyone onside. Thirty three percent domestic support is too risky to go to war on.
(As to the rest of your post, I suggest you've been viewing way too many Chuck Norris movies.)
To: Byron_the_Aussie
ABC-Washington Post Poll has support for the war at 62%. The numbers will only increase after Powell makes his presentation.
As to your posts, I would suggest that you've been watching a few too many Yahoo Serious movies.
Bootyist
To: MadIvan
Artful?? He's a petty thug and so are those who stand to protect him.
To: bootyist-monk
..ABC-Washington Post Poll has support for the war at 62%....Nope.
That figure includes those who support a war stamped rubberstamped by the UN. But the president has said he'll go to war with or without UN approval. AND use nuclear weapons, if he thinks they're appropriate. How many Americans do you think support him wholeheartedly, on that last one?
To: Byron_the_Aussie
Now you're quoting liberal press.... another worrying sign.
To: MadIvan
It's always funny when the press accuse others of using "spin". The author of this article isn't spinning, is he? Does he normally write like this, or does he reserve this kind of "reporting" for those with whom he disagrees?
In a phrase that seems to have been crafted more by Downing Street spin doctors than by sober-minded intelligence officials...
However, the report is likely to prove vulnerable to critics who will point out (note that he doesn't wait for the critics to point it out, he does it for them)
Critics will argue that its findings contrast with those of Hans Blix
Some of the methods said to be used are hardly surprising (so it's OK for Saddam to do it because it comes as no surprise?)
37
posted on
02/02/2003 6:22:43 AM PST
by
Rocky
To: MadIvan
Patience Ivan.
Nothing will be done until HAJ is over.
Also, each day will bring about new lies and duplicity by the left wing to protect their favorite charitable uncle, their Uncle Soddomite.
The UN is becoming more irrelevant with each day.
Each day the treachery of France, Germany and old Europe is exposed. Conversely the loyalty of the UK and the New Europe allies is being recognized.
Nato is being exposed as a impotent fraud compared to our current allies against the Opecker Islamofacists.
Last but not least, I have noticed when during times like this, more left wing maggots in power, explode verbally and show their vile sides. Just look at how the Da$$hole has continued to shoot himself in his feet several times each week. He even has fellow Rat senators publicly telling him to cool it or separating themselves from his stances.
This is an incredible time. Set back and watch the left wingers around the world implode and explode.
They have about 1 more month of self exposure before we start to clean their rich Uncle Soddomite's act up.
38
posted on
02/02/2003 7:27:41 AM PST
by
Grampa Dave
(Stamp out Freepathons! Stop being a Freep Loader! Become a monthly donor!)
To: Byron_the_Aussie
Doesn't matter. The fact is, if he had 1% support, the President still has the power and authority to take us into armed conflict if he feels that it is in our best interest to do so. That is why we are a Republic. Neither you or I have all the facts regarding Iraq (nor should we), so we hire people to take action based on all the information available. I am not in the President's chain of command, and neither are you, so polling data is irrelevant. The fact that X42 couldn't wipe his ass without taking a poll showed how little he understood about true leadership.
If the President screws this up, then he's answerable in 04. Somehow, I don't see that happening.
To: bootyist-monk
..the fact is, if he had 1% support, the President still has the power and authority to take us into armed conflict if he feels that it is in our best interest to do so....That comment is totally absurd.
Some of you newbies scare me, you really do. Your worshipful devotion to the president, your clinging to the State as a security blanket....it's very un-American. And it's VERY un-Free Republic. I suggest you go and read Jim's statement of beliefs on the FR homepage, bootyist.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-44 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson